What's new

SW2: AOTC Director'$ Cut (1 Viewer)

Tim Glover

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 12, 1999
Messages
8,220
Location
Monroe, LA
Real Name
Tim Glover
How does releasing a film in IMAX have anything to do with a "chip on his shoulder because Spider-Man outgrossed his movie"?
:confused:
One thing is for certain. Anything Lucas does is analyzed, tortured, over-explained, countered, griped at..."you didn't do this MY WAY George, blah blah blah!
Maybe some of us have a chip on our shoulder.
 

TheoGB

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 18, 2001
Messages
1,744
Personally, I thought the film was too long. You may find that 23mins will leave us with a very 'zippy' version. It may be better.

Reformatting sounds bad, but then as it was shot digitally I have no idea what sort of reformatting we're talking about. Presumably this is not a pan & scan thing, but actually may involve re-designing certain scenes...
 

Josh Lowe

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 19, 2002
Messages
1,063
How does releasing a film in IMAX have anything to do with a "chip on his shoulder because Spider-Man outgrossed his movie"?
Cutting his film to pieces in order to squeeze a few more dollars out of it, for the sake of increasing its domestic numbers.
 

Graeme Clark

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2000
Messages
2,180
Funny how when a fan cuts out a bunch of TPM, everyone is praising it. But if the director does the same it's a tragedy.
 

Anders Englund

Second Unit
Joined
Jun 29, 1999
Messages
426
Actually, some of the smaller/quitest scenes are some of the best scenes in the film.
... until Greedo went trigger happy...

Seriously, I'm all for OAR and not chopping up the movies, but I think people are takling this a bit too seriously. The whole idea of altering a movie for IMAX seems more like a gimmick, than a serious presentation of the actual movie. In many way comparable to showing a few clips from The Matrix to your friends to show off your HT.

--Anders
 

Bill Griffith

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 8, 2002
Messages
581
My wife wants to go see this, when it comes out here.

Changing the viewing format doesn't bother me in one bit. I would have like to go see it at the IMAX. Just to see if it is better. You don't change the storyline or loose any of the story when changing the format.

HOWEVER

I usually wish they would leave alot of the deleted scenes in the movie. Take Harry Potter. Alot of the Deleted scenes should have been left in. I'm sure there are alot of scenes for this movie that should have been left in as well. So cutting out 20+ minutes of story is not a good idea.

Once I tell my wife this she might not want to go see it, I know I don't.
 

Bill Griffith

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 8, 2002
Messages
581
OH yeah and showing a few clips of the Matrix (Hotel lobby scene) to show off you HT.
Done that :D
but don't see it as the same thing.
 

Chuck Mayer

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2001
Messages
8,509
Location
Northern Virginia
Real Name
Chuck Mayer
See Terrell...it got bloody on page 2! Anyways, I enjoy cable TV as well...it's the only way I can see Young Sherlock Holmes :D Even if it's P&S. But I don't spend any real money on it. My money (which is what the studios care about) supports OAR. So I sleep fine at night, thank you.
Cutting 23 minutes from the film and reformatting it ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS TO ME. Because they aren't to you doesn't make my position weak or random. One is framing and one is story. I have to agree with Terrell on this one.
Lucas intent: I am more than happy to call him to task on certain things. Do I think he is the evil manipulator just trying to outgross HP? No. I think he just wants to try the new technology. The ads and work involved will eat up any profit, and I imagine GL knows that. So it's a technical exercise. Long story short, I'll happily call GL to task on the SE's (I forgive him the PT, because that's merely my opinion - the SE's are more fundamental, but Seth covered that a while back in another thread perfectly). But not this. Liek others said, enjoy the great DVD that comes out just a week later. Or rewatch Monster's Inc. Go see HP2 instead. But let the fans enjoy the IMAX film as much as possible. It's not the end of the world.
Take care,
Chuck
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
Although that comparison is a bit on the silly side. I certainly wouldn't equate what Lucas is allowing to that, no matter how wrong he is for doing it.
Terrell, I only made this extreme example to seperate the "what's wrong with making a buck" idea from the one that is really being discussed, namely the moral/artistic choices you make for WHATEVER reason.

I mean, it's not like cutting for IMAX would be good if he did it for any number of other reasons besides "just to make a buck". Even for charity wouldn't it be better just to donate money from some "regular" showings, even on an IMAX screen.


Thanks to Peter and Tino for clarifying that. I thought that was how it was done, but this new stuff by Howard and Lucas threw me.

You know, why not just use an intermission to switch reels? What's the normal turnaround to run the next IMAX film? Seems like they get them off pretty quickly during a normal day.


I don't know, I guess it doesn't bother me that much, though it would bother me a LOT less if I thought they were simply doing it to see what they could do with it (and perhaps hoping to see their films LOOK even better by being able to be shown on large format.

Still, couldn't they just do 70mm prints instead and show them in the limited theaters that can handle those instead? In that respect I guess I am most bothered because this is not about getting their film onto a bigger print for added resolution only, they also are looking to reach more money making outlets with it (thus IMAX vs standard 70mm).


But in regards to reformatting, what about what Pixar does digitally with their films? Is that too much, or even less artistic? After all there is nothing inherently more artistic about one AR than another, as long as the filmmaker has designed the film for that AR. In the case of Pixar it seems like they are basically going back and remaking the film visually for the 2nd AR, rather than just hacking up the original composition.

Gets kinda grey in those areas. I guess I view it at this point as some guys playing with a gimmick of getting their film on IMAX come hell or high water.

But really, rather than trying to pretend this is the original film why not just put together a standard length IMAX (like 55-60 minutes) of Star Wars highlights, from all 5 films or just from AOTC. Same with Apollo 13. That way you get to see some of your film in IMAX without pretending that it's still the same film.

I don't think Howard is doing it to move up the financial ladder with his film, so I can believe that Lucas has the same reasons for doing it as Howard (therefore, not for money). Besides, AOTC just isn't going to make that much like this anyway.
 

Seth Paxton

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Nov 5, 1998
Messages
7,585
Supporting OAR is something I choose to do. It's not some do or die creed I pattern my entire life around. What next, are we to have spies watching people in private to make sure they're not watching cable TV and P&S films. You're scaring me Michael.
This is a straw man defense. Michael was not advocating the regulation of others, nor was he saying he patterned his ENTIRE life around OAR.

Just his FILM VIEWING. I don't understand how a person could say non-OAR was bad, and then sit and enjoy non-OAR. I also don't see people who insist on having their art presented correctly as being zealots.

Hey, I don't listen to radio stations that jock up songs because I would like to hear the whole song properly, not some guy talking over the first 20 seconds. Does this make me a music zealot because I never listen to those stations, or turn them off when they start doing this?


If a movie is worth watching, it worth watching right. There's nothing militaristic or zealous about that. Just good common sense.

Nobody asked you to go picket TNT or chain yourself to the front doors of AMC.
 

Iain Lambert

Screenwriter
Joined
Jun 7, 1999
Messages
1,345
OK, to take an idea from an even longer film, didn't the original 70mm run of Apocalypse Now play without any end titles, and they were in a booklet instead? Do that, and you're a good third of the way through the cuts you need already. I love Williams' score as much as the next geek, but playing out the music to lead everyone out of the cinema instead is a tiny cut in comparison to anything else.
 

Mike Capulli

Stunt Coordinator
Joined
Sep 12, 2002
Messages
76
In my opinion, AOTC would have been one of the best movies of the summer if the dialog wasn't so hollow. Im trying to remember what Lucas said in an interview about this... Wasn't it something about how the language is supposed to be very properly spoken or something?
 

Paul Case

Supporting Actor
Joined
Jan 5, 2002
Messages
532
I always get suspicious of people who feel the need to apply some kind of high-minded morality to the process of making/distributing/watching films. What a filmmaker decides to do with his films is his business. He/she is under no moral obligation to make a particular choice in regard to his/her films or how they are presented. Nobody is going to die and the world will not find itself suffering under the weight of tyranny and oppression if a filmmaker decides to edit his/her film and exhibit it in a non-OAR presentation. You may not like the decision, but that is irrelevant. The entire matter is trivial. To imply that such decisions are somehow immoral just seems ridiculous and hyperbolic to me. Save it for the arguments over world peace.
I suppose I just get tired of the very vocal extremist minority bashing everything that doesn't fall within their very narrow, almost fascist view of "what is correct." Expressing a certain viewpoint is fine, but constantly going on and on about how somebody like Lucas is a greedy corporate monster, or how Lucas has 'a chip on his shoulder' because another movie made more money is just ridiculous and annoying. You don't know the man, I don't know the man, so how can we have justification for silly unilateral statements like that?
There are certainly no moral questions here. The owner/creator of the film decided it was ok to present his film a certain way and that is that. George Lucas doesn't owe anybody on this forum a single thing. Not one thing. Just like nobody on this forum owes George Lucas one single thing. So if you don't like his movies or his decisions regarding their presentation then don't go see them. Don't buy them on DVD. Don't buy an IMAX ticket. Just don't give the man your money and leave it at that. Why rant endlessly (and uselessly) about something that ultimately shouldn't affect you in the first place?
Anyway, just to be clear, I'm no Lucas apologist. I hate what he did to the SEs and I don't want to see a reformatted AOTC with 23 minutes cut out of it. But that is Lucas' decision to make and I'm not going to judge him morally on something as ultimately trivial as an IMAX presentation of a summer sci-fi action flick. I just won't go see it in an IMAX theater and that will be the end of it.
I just think we should try to get some perspective here. Especially since a loaded DVD of the full uncut film in its OAR will be out within days of the Imax opening.
 

Jason Seaver

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Jun 30, 1997
Messages
9,303
You know, why not just use an intermission to switch reels? What's the normal turnaround to run the next IMAX film? Seems like they get them off pretty quickly during a normal day.
It seems like about a 20-minute delay normally, so it could be done, but it would probably put a real pinch on the exhibitors: Now, instead of a two-hour movie, you've got a 2:25 movie plus 20-25 minutes of intermission - so a signle show of Apollo 13:TIE takes up three times as many "slots" as does a standard IMAX film. Sure, maybe you sell more tickets for a Hollywood film, and you definitely sell more popcorn for Star Wars than Beavers!, but it could be the difference between two shows a day and three shows a day.

And it's not like they can charge much more for it - the place in Providence where is saw B&TB only bumped the price from $8 to $10, even though the feature-length movie took up two "slots", though they probably made it up in volume. An unedited-with-intermissions version would use three "slots" and make it even more untenable.
 

Vickie_M

Senior HTF Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2001
Messages
3,208
Once Upon A Time in America said:
Thanks. I would have gone to see AOTC and Apollo 13 if they'd just played the NORMAL film print. Not now. Thanks to this thread.
 

Michael St. Clair

Senior HTF Member
Joined
May 3, 1999
Messages
6,001
Because I think that if a movie is worth watching, it's worth watching any way you can get it.
And some of us think that if a film is worth watching, it is worth the effort and expense of watching it the right way.

To me, cable is mostly for original programming and certainly not for compromised film. To each their own, I suppose. But some of us will continue to stand up for the principle of watching film right, and the HTF is a good place to do it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum statistics

Threads
356,710
Messages
5,121,094
Members
144,146
Latest member
SaladinNagasawa
Recent bookmarks
0
Top